1.Title, director and release year?
Blind Spot was a documentary released in 2008 by Adolfo Doring.
2.What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The main issue that this film addresses is the key political term “peak oil.” The Hubbert Curve was made in the 1950’s predicting that the earth’s oil extraction was going to peak and decrease, in a parabolic curve so to speak. The prediction was correct, and as of 2005, we have officially reached peak oil and are on our way down. Now, there are many different opinions as many interest groups on both sides have skewed their numbers to either show that peak oil is a bigger problem than it is or not such a significant issue. However, the fact of the matter is, our liquid crude oil is on the down slope, and by 2050, we could be possibly looking at the end of oil. The film suggests, as do I, that we need to start implementing changes in our legislation, government, and societal structure in order to counteract this problem. If we wait too long, there may be not enough time for us to make the necessary changes in order to save ourselves and our planet.
3.What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are several sustainability problems that are involved with peak oil. Like any other major issue concerning the country’s interactions with the world, politics are a major influence. The government has given tax subsidies to gas and oil companies in order to encourage business. As fossil fuels are cheap abundant energy in most countries, governments tend to maintain the status quo. Corporations play a part in this, as they affect the areas environment that they receive their oil from. Wars are started due to the lust and need for oil, as the economy depends on it. As for the environmental issues, oil encourages the increase in CO2 emissions causing global warming to be a major problem, a problem we may not even be able to prevent. There are also several health problems that the pollution causes to our lungs, heart, and other body functions. The movie did not address this: The scary thing is, our economy has only been known to be successful if there is growth. If there is no growth, the economy suffers. If there is a decrease in the amount of oil or if the prices of oil increase, the economy suffers. What will happen if we continue to depend on oil and not break the status quo?
4.What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
There was a very compelling book that I’ve wanted to read ever since I saw the movie: Plan B 2.0. There are many theories and suggestions for what we should do if all else fail. What should we do with the economy? There are a few theories. One is to continue growth. Another is the step method, where our economy will slowly take steps down and we can rebuild from there. The movie introduced the idea of overshooting. This theory suggests that at the same time oil decreases significantly, the human population will be rising to its highest levels. A huge amount of problems will ensue, and that’s why we need to prepare with alternatives.
5.What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
The film stated that biofuel was becoming more and more of a possibility as being used as a major alternative and in affect would decrease the amount of food. This won’t happen. I believe we will move onto other energy sources such as nuclear power and solar energy before we concern ourselves with biofuel.
6.What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to find statistics on a statement that was made in the film. The film suggested that as more fuel efficient cars are being purchased, the more comfortable people feel driving them. Therefore, they would drive more miles as the price of oil would drop, creating more oil consumption than ever before. I have heard of this theory when hybrid cars came into existence. The owners felt that they were being more environmentally aware, still continuing with their daily routines as before. However, it is the fact that driving less and using alternative modes of transportation help the environment. Hybrids are not perfect. In fact, they are the leaders in using rare earth metals. I would want to find some statistics on this theory and possibly find other theories of people feeling more comfortable about their green technology and still being detrimental.
7.What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
The audience affects everyone who has ever considered getting an automobile or owns one the most. People who are also in the automotive industry or conduct business in the government or other corporations are also targeted. Education is the main factor in solving sustainability problems. Movements have even been started by children. By spreading the word of peak oil around the world and making the necessary changes so we can prevent what is going to come near 2050. I believe that this film will show the real problems that peak oil is concerned with, and not what is filled by the politicians and the media. They will be more educated, and will hopefully make a change in their own lifestyles.
8.What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
The film suggested alternatives such as fuel efficient cars and solar energy. By heavily implementing other energy sources, we can reduce our dependence on oil. Nuclear power and solar energy are the two energy sources that I believe can save our energy crisis as well as the environment. Sure, the toxic waste from the nuclear power is not degradable. However, I believe that this is a fact we may have to face for the time being. It is a major problem, but we are on a time constraint.
9.What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I believe focusing more on climate change would enhance its environmental education. The film helped the viewers understand the meaning of peak oil and what it has caused. Jimmy Carter suggested a change back in 1970 and was shot down. By showing more images of the smog and pollution created by the matrix of issues, and including more images of the health affects they have on the human population may have a greater affect. Overall, this film was a great introduction of peak oil to the general population.
Blind Spot
1. Title, director and release year?
Blind Spot was a documentary released in 2008 by Adolfo Doring.
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The main issue that this film addresses is the key political term “peak oil.” The Hubbert Curve was made in the 1950’s predicting that the earth’s oil extraction was going to peak and decrease, in a parabolic curve so to speak. The prediction was correct, and as of 2005, we have officially reached peak oil and are on our way down. Now, there are many different opinions as many interest groups on both sides have skewed their numbers to either show that peak oil is a bigger problem than it is or not such a significant issue. However, the fact of the matter is, our liquid crude oil is on the down slope, and by 2050, we could be possibly looking at the end of oil. The film suggests, as do I, that we need to start implementing changes in our legislation, government, and societal structure in order to counteract this problem. If we wait too long, there may be not enough time for us to make the necessary changes in order to save ourselves and our planet.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are several sustainability problems that are involved with peak oil. Like any other major issue concerning the country’s interactions with the world, politics are a major influence. The government has given tax subsidies to gas and oil companies in order to encourage business. As fossil fuels are cheap abundant energy in most countries, governments tend to maintain the status quo. Corporations play a part in this, as they affect the areas environment that they receive their oil from. Wars are started due to the lust and need for oil, as the economy depends on it. As for the environmental issues, oil encourages the increase in CO2 emissions causing global warming to be a major problem, a problem we may not even be able to prevent. There are also several health problems that the pollution causes to our lungs, heart, and other body functions. The movie did not address this: The scary thing is, our economy has only been known to be successful if there is growth. If there is no growth, the economy suffers. If there is a decrease in the amount of oil or if the prices of oil increase, the economy suffers. What will happen if we continue to depend on oil and not break the status quo?
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
There was a very compelling book that I’ve wanted to read ever since I saw the movie: Plan B 2.0. There are many theories and suggestions for what we should do if all else fail. What should we do with the economy? There are a few theories. One is to continue growth. Another is the step method, where our economy will slowly take steps down and we can rebuild from there. The movie introduced the idea of overshooting. This theory suggests that at the same time oil decreases significantly, the human population will be rising to its highest levels. A huge amount of problems will ensue, and that’s why we need to prepare with alternatives.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
The film stated that biofuel was becoming more and more of a possibility as being used as a major alternative and in affect would decrease the amount of food. This won’t happen. I believe we will move onto other energy sources such as nuclear power and solar energy before we concern ourselves with biofuel.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to find statistics on a statement that was made in the film. The film suggested that as more fuel efficient cars are being purchased, the more comfortable people feel driving them. Therefore, they would drive more miles as the price of oil would drop, creating more oil consumption than ever before. I have heard of this theory when hybrid cars came into existence. The owners felt that they were being more environmentally aware, still continuing with their daily routines as before. However, it is the fact that driving less and using alternative modes of transportation help the environment. Hybrids are not perfect. In fact, they are the leaders in using rare earth metals. I would want to find some statistics on this theory and possibly find other theories of people feeling more comfortable about their green technology and still being detrimental.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
The audience affects everyone who has ever considered getting an automobile or owns one the most. People who are also in the automotive industry or conduct business in the government or other corporations are also targeted. Education is the main factor in solving sustainability problems. Movements have even been started by children. By spreading the word of peak oil around the world and making the necessary changes so we can prevent what is going to come near 2050. I believe that this film will show the real problems that peak oil is concerned with, and not what is filled by the politicians and the media. They will be more educated, and will hopefully make a change in their own lifestyles.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
The film suggested alternatives such as fuel efficient cars and solar energy. By heavily implementing other energy sources, we can reduce our dependence on oil. Nuclear power and solar energy are the two energy sources that I believe can save our energy crisis as well as the environment. Sure, the toxic waste from the nuclear power is not degradable. However, I believe that this is a fact we may have to face for the time being. It is a major problem, but we are on a time constraint.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I believe focusing more on climate change would enhance its environmental education. The film helped the viewers understand the meaning of peak oil and what it has caused. Jimmy Carter suggested a change back in 1970 and was shot down. By showing more images of the smog and pollution created by the matrix of issues, and including more images of the health affects they have on the human population may have a greater affect. Overall, this film was a great introduction of peak oil to the general population.